I would add more about the specifics associated with the City West station. The path also winds around limestone retaining rocks, has other hazards that can easily be hit near the path, and during school times, large volumes of pedestrians occupy the full width of the path (being teenagers most deliberately ignore any bell or verbal request to move to the left of the path). Two cross walks add confusion as many pedestrians wait for cyclists despite having the right of way. Generally, PSPs do not have pedestrian crossings, so it comes unexpectedly for cyclists unfamiliar with the path.

stealthbike wrote:I would add more about the specifics associated with the City West station. The path also winds around limestone retaining rocks, has other hazards that can easily be hit near the path, and during school times, large volumes of pedestrians occupy the full width of the path (being teenagers most deliberately ignore any bell or verbal request to move to the left of the path). Two cross walks add confusion as many pedestrians wait for cyclists despite having the right of way. Generally, PSPs do not have pedestrian crossings, so it comes unexpectedly for cyclists unfamiliar with the path.

agree 100% - i ride through there every day to work & back, and its a pretty bad spot.

it isn't helped by the attitude (specifically speed) of some cyclists who ride through there though - they need to engage some brain cells and realise your speed needs to be adjusted with so many people on the path

I would add more about the specifics associated with the City West station. The path also winds around limestone retaining rocks, has other hazards that can easily be hit near the path, and during school times, large volumes of pedestrians occupy the full width of the path (being teenagers most deliberately ignore any bell or verbal request to move to the left of the path). Two cross walks add confusion as many pedestrians wait for cyclists despite having the right of way. Generally, PSPs do not have pedestrian crossings, so it comes unexpectedly for cyclists unfamiliar with the path.

Actually, as already stated, pedestrians do not have equal right of way, but superior right of way. A large group of pedestrians, in particular kids, requires slowing down and stopping if necessary. While cyclists are required to keep left pedestrians are not which is one reason they may not do so, or take kindly to being told to. Providing they part, even if slowly and reluctantly, they are not being obstructive (in the legal form) and in some way can be seen as acting safely by inhibiting fast cycling where high interaction is taking place.

The reason SPs (Shared Paths) in general, and that includes the Principal ones (PSPs) do not have marked cross walks is that they don't need them as pedestrians have full crossing 'right of way' anyway, anywhere on the path. But as most cyclists are ignorant of this, and the risks at City West are so great, MRWA decided (quite rightly) to reinforce that rule here. The problem is not the infrastructure but many of the cyclists using it.

As for "so it comes unexpectedly for cyclists unfamiliar with the path" that is just unacceptable. The crossing markings are a legal device and there are also quite clear advance warning signs (Black legs on yellow sign). Any cyclist failing to notice those, and give way, is just not riding with due care and attention. Far too many cyclists here fail to observe ALL the safety markings and blast through even when pedestrians are on the crossing!

You could add Rudderham Drive and Rous Head Rd North Fremantle. If you try to cycle to the Rottnest ferry you have to compete for road space with lots of trucks. You can't even retreat to a footpath because there are none. The irony in this is that the Fremantle Port Authority, who control these roads, publicise the importance of their OH&S safety standards. If you work on the inside of the fence it's all safety inductions and hi-vis vests, in their public areas it's like a third world country.

is there anything that be done from a Policy point of view to ensure any future new works/upgrades avoid more black spots??? A case in point if the installation of traffic calming devices (eg islands, chicanes etc). Whilst i do not diagree with there intended purpose they do seem to make for an increased risk for cyclists. Thereby possibly solving one problem (vehicle speed) but creating another (squishing of cyclists who fall under vehicle wheels).

The 3 stand outs for me are:1) The Mitchell freeway psp where it follows the road Cayley st (from Leeder st) in Glendalough.I have had a head on with another bike here as has good friend of mine with the other bike being on the wrong side of the path overtaking a walker.2) The Mitchell freeway psp between the Vincent st bridge and the Leederville train station.I have a head on crash with another bike as well, when the other fellow thought he would overtake a third bike with me rolling down the hill towards the CBD.AND 3) The East parade path T junction with the path that follows the Graham Farmer freeway.Ok, so I havent had a crash here, YET but give it time.

The common themem here is people who want to be on the wrong side of the paths! I know that I am heading in the opposite direction to the majority of people during the rush hour, but if other path users keep to the left, there wouldnt be a problem!Maybe we should divert the attention to the cause here and black spot idiots!(or issue firearms to the rest of us!)

rollin66 wrote:I would consider Cranford Ave overpass a potential Black Spot due the the amount of traffic going in all directions. Not sure if there has been any accidents there but I have seen a few near misses

I'd go with that - it seems to have been designed as a conspiracy to evoke accidents between cars and bikes. But I also do not know if there have been any accidents. It'd be quite a surprise if there have not been any.

Cyclesnail sent him a link to the site which this forum help to build. The items were sent to minister of transport last year and majority are still aplicable showing the amount of interest to resolve them.

Perhaps the main/popular PSP routes need a wider path to accommodate 2 riders wide in each direction plus segregation of peds from riders. The traditional traffic engineering solution to congestion is to add extra lanes after all.

Another PSP where there is serious congestion and high potential for bike-ped crashes is the path north of Scarborough to Hillarys.

Some serious misunderstanding here Paulz.

Firstly a PSP is a shared path and the rules for a shared path are single file only (except overtaking) so you must not ride two abreast. Especially where visibility is poor or paths join, if you are on the wrong side you are asking for trouble.

Secondly, the PSP on the coast (Scabs to Hillarys) IS NOT a PSP. It is a recreational shared path (RSP if you prefer acronyms). This is a shared path, primarily intended for pedestrians and on which bike riding is allowed. I use the term 'bike riding' because fast cyclists are not welcome by pedestrians, families with children and the local community. Any speed above 20kph is too fast for a RSP. Please do not use this for fast cycling - do what the responsible cyclists do and use the road alongside..

There ae 2 problems here that you are missing. Firstly motorists see people riding on the RSP and others walkingon it and they assume it's a PSP. Then they get held up by a "bloody" cyclist on the road when the speed limit is already 50km/h instead of 60km and they get annoyed. There is nothing to show motorist that it's an RSP and not a PSP and even if there was a sign they wouldn't understand the differece.

Secondly and I'm sorry I think I deleted it but peds have the right to walk 2 or 3 abreast and basically their rights are almost absolute? Well isn't that an eye opener. For my 50 cents it comes back to the direction of walking issue. You're saying peds can wander all over the path and I better make gosh darn sure I slow, stop & do everything I can to avoid them. Then you let them walk with their back to me and I may as well have the guy from the early days of motoring holding the little red flag and walking in front of cars as they drive walking in front of me cause I'm so unsafe!

I'm just saying if you applied the same rules to bicycles riding on the road sharing the space with cars as you do with peds sharing a path with bikes there would be deaths. You can't have a road/pathway with all the responsibility and duty of care on the shoulders of 1 of the users but not the others.

Jezza75 wrote:The 3 stand outs for me are:1) The Mitchell freeway psp where it follows the road Cayley st (from Leeder st) in Glendalough.I have had a head on with another bike here as has good friend of mine with the other bike being on the wrong side of the path overtaking a walker.2) The Mitchell freeway psp between the Vincent st bridge and the Leederville train station.I have a head on crash with another bike as well, when the other fellow thought he would overtake a third bike with me rolling down the hill towards the CBD.AND 3) The East parade path T junction with the path that follows the Graham Farmer freeway.Ok, so I havent had a crash here, YET but give it time.

I've walked that intersection of the midland line and GFF psp speciffically to check the sight lines and issues people seem to believe exists there. I don't see it. No matter which direction you approach from there are good sight lines. If you slow approaching the T from Midland and look before turning there should never be an incident there. If you really think it's that bad maybe they should install a roundabout there but seriously I can't see a need for it.

Jezza75 wrote:The common themem here is people who want to be on the wrong side of the paths! I know that I am heading in the opposite direction to the majority of people during the rush hour, but if other path users keep to the left, there wouldnt be a problem!Maybe we should divert the attention to the cause here and black spot idiots!(or issue firearms to the rest of us!)

Jezza75 wrote:3) The East parade path T junction with the path that follows the Graham Farmer freeway.Ok, so I havent had a crash here, YET but give it time.

On several occasions I've had people just ride out in front of me from the East Parade path as I've passed the T - in both directions. I've been able to see them clearly as I approach the intersection when heading east so I'm positive it's not a sight problem, it's a LOOKING problem. All that's needed is a STOP sign and some kind of reminder to look both ways.

Actually, as already stated, pedestrians do not have equal right of way, but superior right of way. A large group of pedestrians, in particular kids, requires slowing down and stopping if necessary. While cyclists are required to keep left pedestrians are not which is one reason they may not do so, or take kindly to being told to. Providing they part, even if slowly and reluctantly, they are not being obstructive (in the legal form) and in some way can be seen as acting safely by inhibiting fast cycling where high interaction is taking place.

The reason SPs (Shared Paths) in general, and that includes the Principal ones (PSPs) do not have marked cross walks is that they don't need them as pedestrians have full crossing 'right of way' anyway, anywhere on the path. But as most cyclists are ignorant of this, and the risks at City West are so great, MRWA decided (quite rightly) to reinforce that rule here. The problem is not the infrastructure but many of the cyclists using it.

As for "so it comes unexpectedly for cyclists unfamiliar with the path" that is just unacceptable. The crossing markings are a legal device and there are also quite clear advance warning signs (Black legs on yellow sign). Any cyclist failing to notice those, and give way, is just not riding with due care and attention. Far too many cyclists here fail to observe ALL the safety markings and blast through even when pedestrians are on the crossing!

I accept what you state here but that does not mean that it is logical or right. It is not safe to ride up hill clipped in behind a large group of pedestrians as one would be constantly stopping and unclipping. So cyclists are reduced to walking whenever they encounter a group of pedestrains. Surely, common sense can require pedestrians to share the path to enable cyclists to pass??

Secondly, the intention of the OP was to identify cycling black spots. Even with the signage, it is still a hazardous location for both cyclists and pedestrians because of the behaviour of both cyclists and pedestrains and the design of the path. It is badly designed and therefore can be partially to blame for accidents and injuries. We will never reach nirvana when all cyclists and pedestrians both understand anf follow the law. So rather than relying on this, design paths that minimize the risk. IMHO, the design here contributes to the risk.

Thirdly, a shared path that provides no rights to cyclists and all the rights to pedestrians is not a shared path, it is a footpath that cyclists are allowed to ride on. We need to go back to the drawing board and rethink cycling laws and infrastructure from the start.

citywomble wrote:alongside the freeway extension to Mandurah, as there was not pedestrian path or traffic, it was the most bloody stupid thing to do to make it a shared path. It should have been a fast bike path and, if future development brought pedestrians they should then have a dedicated footpath.

Thirdly, a shared path that provides no rights to cyclists and all the rights to pedestrians is not a shared path, it is a footpath that cyclists are allowed to ride on. We need to go back to the drawing board and rethink cycling laws and infrastructure from the start.

You and I are in violent agreement on that:)

I believe that cyclists have been done a big injustice by providing shared paths that are promoted as bike paths. Shared Paths are not a solution for serious 'cyclists' but are very useful for 'bike riders' such as children, families and everyday people riding everyday bikes in everyday clothes (POBSOs) - slowly. Unfortunately, by providing them the government has then considered the job done and either failed to provide an alternative or, worse, totally screwed up the adjacent roads.

The moment a cyclist forgoes normal pedals and 'clips in' then better dedicated and fast infrastructure is needed, not necessarily a bike path, but proper safe bike lanes and bike suitable roads too. Where the road alongside is unsuitable (Kwinana Freeway beside PSP) then a dedicated bike path is needed and pedestrians (and possibly POBSOs) provided with a (shared) footpath.

Note that need/demand can be defined by clip in = infrastructure needed. Its not the cyclists that are too fast or wrong (after all they have been told they are bike paths) but the infrastructure that is too slow and wrong.

Jezza75 wrote:3) The East parade path T junction with the path that follows the Graham Farmer freeway.Ok, so I havent had a crash here, YET but give it time.

On several occasions I've had people just ride out in front of me from the East Parade path as I've passed the T - in both directions. I've been able to see them clearly as I approach the intersection when heading east so I'm positive it's not a sight problem, it's a LOOKING problem. All that's needed is a STOP sign and some kind of reminder to look both ways.

A stop sign here would only stop the people who care enough to read the sign. And the people who approach from the river to turn right towards Midland think it is their birth right to cut the corner.Maybe a round a bout would help, but really....

There are are a few different classes of black spot (fatal risk areas) I can think of1. PSP locations 2. On road road cycling infrastructure failures3. infrastructure free locations

These can then be subdivided into a) design/capacity problems and b) maintenance problems.Most of the existing items can be categorised in this way.

My three favourites would have to be1a - City West. It's only a matter of time (at least one pedestrian on the northbound PSP has already been killed by a vehicle leaving the freeway )2a + 2b - Cockburn Road. Cycle lane/roadside shoulder that stops and starts. And disappears completely occasionally due to road marking wear (southbound, north of Coogee)

A bit of a mix which needs a bunch of money found would be northern PSP at Cedric street - frankly the whole northbound section from Perth to Balcatta is a bit of a mess.

Finally, as the thing most likely to kill me is vehicles drifting into the bike lane/road shoulder, particularly on left hand bends I'd like money throuwn at two things not yet mentioneda) application of audible edge lines (rumble strips) to cycle lanes, particularly sweeping left hand bends on 60kph+ roads (eg. Curtin avenue, west coast highway, cockburn road)b) a public awareness campaign highlighting that one should not drive in the cycle lane. This should include media adverts, roadside avers (perhaps mounted below existing signs on the spare holes) and some active policing.

On the BTA Facebook page I have posted some material relating to the campaign started by the Times in London. I really recommend that people look at the eight specific measures that are suggested to improve cycling safety

After having read the summary on our website, a journalist asked me which ones would be the five WORST black spots. The question was asked in context of the unsafe manner in which cars pass bicycles.(And the lack of a legalised one meter passing distance).

Mine are City West PSP, Hutton Street, St. Georges Terrace, and (since last fortnight) Wellington Street in front of the arena

for me the worst would be central avenue. I've been hit twice on it. Also the storm water grates on both sides of the road run parallel to the kerb so you risk jamming a wheel. given up reporting that one.

CycleSnail wrote:After having read the summary on our website, a journalist asked me which ones would be the five WORST black spots. The question was asked in context of the unsafe manner in which cars pass bicycles.(And the lack of a legalised one meter passing distance).

Mine are City West PSP, Hutton Street, St. Georges Terrace, and (since last fortnight) Wellington Street in front of the arena

Touch wood, but Wellington is pretty good in front of the Arena. Heading west, wait as if you're a vehicle turning right out of the building site and a few seconds after the green Walk sign you'll get a green forward/turn right traffic light. You've then got the road to yourself till the next set of lights.

Heading east can be hairy with the narrow lane, so just claim it once you're on the road from the PSP.

Agree re City West (lots of schoolkids and general gormless peds, plus a few hot headed cyclists), and Hutton St is always a bit scary.

Yale Rd Thornlie - "Upgraded" to slow traffic and improve pedestrian and cyclist safety with the narrowing of lanes, installation of islands and marking of a shoulder including bicycle symbols. The shoulder lanes end at major intersections and cyclists are diverted by road signage and infrastructure to the footpath........ worse, where islands are installed mid-block and at minor intersections the shoulder lane narrows to about 600mm, squeezing you between the island and any traffic.......

Berehaven Ave Thornlie - see above

Yale Rd/Spencer Rd intersection - left turn arrows have been installed on all corners and linked to the pedestrian lights. When a person presses the pedestrian button traffic travelling the same direction get a red arrow. I have lost count of the times I have had a close call with a driver turning against the arrow or abused/threatened/shouted at for having the temerity to cross the road with the light. Oh, just to point out, I don't ride across - when heading east on Spencer Rd the marked shoulder disappears just before the intersection and as above, dumps you on the footpath.....